The logic of togetherness – how teams can make each other flourish

A team is often put together quickly, but good collaboration takes longer. Most teams start out motivated – but misunderstandings creep in over time. These don’t have to be dramas, everyday life is enough. How good cooperation is created Good cooperation requires clarity about expectations, trust in dealings – and leadership that does not moderate away differences, but makes use of them. A look at the Riemann-Thomann model, which distinguishes between four basic psychological orientations, can help here:

• Closeness: seeks relationship, exchange, belonging.
• Distance: needs autonomy, clarity, independence.
• Duration: values order, stability, reliability.
• Change: thrives on variety, tempo, impulses.

We all move between these poles. Teams do too. An example: Good will meets wrong tempo An IT team had been working efficiently for years, with a distanced and long-term focus. Then a new manager arrived – outgoing, creative, fast. The distance-permanence-imprint met a proximity-change-imprint. Spontaneous check-ins, open feedback rounds, a flood of ideas – the team withdrew. The manager felt alone. Only a workshop with a close look at the needs of the individual people brought clarity. Cooperation was readjusted: less clocking, more clarity, targeted dialog. Trust grew – and with it the feeling of being in exactly the right place – even if not everyone works in the same way. The team phases – a useful compass But it is not only personality that shapes team dynamics. A team’s path also follows patterns. When a new team member joins, team processes are restarted and communication, cooperation and leadership need to be renegotiated. Knowing that team building also takes place in phases supports this process and helps in the search for the right next step. A look at the team phases according to Bruce Tuckman:

1. Forming – getting to know each other. Polite, wait-and-see, with uncertainties.
2. Storming – the friction. Conflicts, power games, finding roles.
3. Norming – settling down. Rules emerge, trust grows.
4. Performing – the functioning. Roles are clear, collaboration succeeds.
5. Adjourning – the farewell. Reflection, closure, transition.

It can be helpful for management to look at what phase a team is in and what it needs now. After all, a team that is stuck in storming needs something different than a team in the norming process. What organizations can do

1. Recognize and name patterns. Teams benefit from a common language for personality profiles and development phases. Those who understand what makes others tick – and what this has to do with their own behavior – can better classify tensions and use them constructively.
   → Workshops and leadership dialogs create space for reflection and assessment.
2. Understand and consider team logic. A team that lives proximity needs different impulses than one that relies heavily on autonomy. Exchange, reliability or creative leeway – all of these should match the respective dynamic.
   → Instead of blueprints, we need solutions with a sense of proportion and purpose.
3. Developing leadership with an eye for diversity. Good leadership does not compensate, but recognizes what works – and when it works. Those who can read patterns understand friction earlier and provide more targeted support.
   → Training, coaching and peer formats expand your repertoire and strengthen your own impact.

Teams are living systems with psychological logic and an emotional background. Understanding this – and providing good support – lays the foundation for collaboration that not only works, but can be successful.